tv MSNBC Live With Craig Melvin MSNBC January 26, 2018 10:00am-11:00am PST
thank you for being with us. chris jansing takes it over in new york. chris? >> thanks so much, andrea. that's a very busy day. good afternoon. i am chris jansing in for craig melvin. we'll continue to talk about these e ploxplosive allegations against hillary clinton. she was told in 2008 that a campaign aide had been accused of sexual harassment but
declined to fire him. also stopping trump. new reaction to reports including by nbc that the president tried to fire special counsel robert mueller last summer. one democrat says he sees patterns of interference that have taken us back to the nixon era. and is this enough. after more than 150 women accuse larry nassar of sexual assault, we're seeing another big departure at his university. and a new ultimatum to the entire board of usa gymnastics. a hillary clinton staffer from her 2008 campaign confirming to nbc that the then candidate declined to fire a top aide accused of sexual harassment. his name is berns strider. he was her faith adviser. clinton decided instead to dock his pay and send him for counselling. that, despite a recommendation from her campaign manager to get rid of him.
solis doyle declined to comment when reached by nbc news. the firm that represented the campaign in 2008 did release a statement to nbc news saying, quote, to ensure a safe working environment, the campaign had a process to address complaints of misconduct or harassment. when matters arose, they were reviewed in accordance with these policies and appropriate action was taken. this complaint was no exception. for more let me bring in andrea mitchell. katie fang is an msnbc legal analyst. give us a little perspective here because you've been following hillary clinton for such a long time. let's start with the 2008 campaign. what can you tell us about these players? >> i frankly, did not think of bern strider as a major player or adviser. he gave her readings every day. i don't think he was a major player in that campaign.
patty solis doyle was initially the campaign manager and replaced but this has been a troubling issue for hillary clinton because she comes trailing all of the legacy of her husband's poor behavior and was never politically blamed for that either when in the white house or afterwards. she engendered a lot of sympathy for that. there were women when she was first run, and we did stories on that, who said she should have been standing up and been stronger against her husband. should not have defended her husband. should not have, quote, stood by her man. but that said, that did not affect the voting in key areas, key states that supported her grancy barack obama. it was never such a huge issue in 2008. then it became an issue when donald trump piv ofting on the "access hollywood" revelations turned on her with all of the past accusers against bill clinton at that final debate in las vegas and brought them out
and delayed the beginning of the debate because he wanted them to sit in the family section in the front row and have, you know, direct eye contact with her, which would have been upsetting in the extreme. it was a big play by supporters of donald trump in the trump campaign. this has been a tough issue and it was resurrected, the issue when the me, too, campaign, the women's movement, you know, became so explosive. he was very closely aligned with hillary clinton in so many ways and she was, some said, late to criticize him. >> in a "new york times" interview with lena dunham, this all coming out in the wake of the me, too, movement, she said i just wanted to let you know
that harvey is a rapist, she says, she told some campaign aides, and this is going to come out at some point. she told kristina schake, the campaign's deputy campaign director. i think it's a really bad idea for him to host fund raisers and be involved because it's an open secret in hollywood that he has a problem with sexual assaults. earlier, during the 2008 presidential race, tina brown, the magazine editor, cautioned a member of mrs. clinton's inner circle about him. i was hearing harvey's sleaziness with women had escalated since i left talk and she was so wise to be closely associated with him. you have, katie, two different times, right, in our country. 2008 was a different time, our entire history was a different time in the wake of the me, too, movement and what we've seen
over the last 24 hours, for example. but from your perspective, from a legal perspective, does there seem to be anything wrong with what happened here? >> well, it shouldn't take the me too movement for somebody to do the right thing. what we know is the campaign staffer and all of the members of the 2008 hillary clinton campaign had to sign nondisclosure agreements. so once again, this nda, the nondisclosure agreement rears its ugly head. we heard about it in terms of harvey weinstein using it as a weapon to silence his victims he was abusing and harassing. so in this particular situation, knowing that her, quote, faith adviser which smacks of hypocrisy, is sexually harassing a 30-year-old young staffer and the solution is to just move the staffer to another job and to dock him pay and order him to go to counseling. that's not what you'd see happen today in 2018. from a legal perspective, the boom would be lowered and you
know that that man, berns strider, would have been terminated immediately from any campaign that's run today. but it's really tragic that it's only coming forward now and when people have contacted this young woman, she's, of course, declined to comment. why? because there's an nda. >> he was fired. i want to ask you more about the nda. as you know, andrea, he was fired -- he was hired five years later to lead an independent group that supported hillary clinton's campaign in 2016, correct the record. that was created by david brock, who is a close ally of hillary clinton. but then he was fired for workplace issues, right? >> exactly. so clearly this did not stop in 2008, his behaviors, as have been alleged. and the fact he was fired in 2016 tells you even from the outside group which was not technically a part of the campaign but was affiliated. it was a super pac working for the campaign by david brock, a very close ally. so one has to ask, what behaviors did he exhibit, what
misbehavior did he exhibit in those intervening years which could have perhaps been avoided, averted if he had been fired in 2008. >> the complainant said that mr. strider had rubbed her shoulders inappropriately, kissed her on the forehead, sent her a string of suggestive e-mails, including at least one during the night. but she has never spoken about this, katie. i want to go back to your point about her having signed an nda. most of the campaign staffers for hillary clinton did that. it bars people on the campaign from discussing anything that happened internally. is there anything about a sexual harassment claim or inappropriate behavior that would release anyone from an nda? >> typically, the nda is an exceptionally comprehensive document but it should not cover criminal conduct, and if it was criminal conduct, then it suggests it was because it was unwanted sexual contact made upon a young woman by berns
strider, then it shouldn't be covered. it shows an incredible amount of respect for the power of that nda. there was an independent law firm hired to investigate it back in 2008 when the allegations came forward to the campaign. but you can't hide behind that also. you can't say, well, my law firm looked into it and took immediate action. that's not exactly the right thing to do either. so the ndas these days are all under attack because legally speaking, should the laws change? should legislators change the laws to make it so that ndas cannot cover sexual abuse? >> katie phang, andrea mitchell, thank you for reacting to this breaking news. we'll have more on it throughout the day on msnbc. but we have this other big story, fast developing story about the russia investigation. of course, it's still a few hours before president trump is scheduled to touch down at joint base andrews in maryland, back from davos. but the russia investigation is once again stealing the president's headlines. nbc news has confirmed a story
first reported by "the new york times" that shortly after robert mueller was named special counsel in may, trump ordered white house counsel don mcgahn to fire him. mcgann refused. trump attorney ty cobb declined to comment to nbc. out of respect for the office of the special counsel, but as is often the case, president trump did have something to say. >> mr. president, why did you fire robert mueller? why did you want to fire robert mueller? >> fake news, folks. fake news. typical "new york times," fake story. >> so fake news to the president, maybe. but to be clear, this is a story confirmed by a wide swath of organizations with many sources, including nbc. as you can see from the headlines that are there. what's more, it's one more piece of a puzzle that could indicate the special counsel may be pursuing a potential obstruction of justice charge. joining me, ken dilanian, intelligence and national security reporter. ken, tell us more about this report and how it could fit into
a potential obstruction of justice charge. >> good afternoon, chris. a source with firsthand knowledge confirmed to nbc news that president trump ordered the firing of robert mueller back in june but backed off when his white house counsel threatened to resign. as you just saw there, president trump has called the story fake news but importantly, the white house has not issued any kind of specific denial of this story. this alleged firing happened at a time in june when the russia investigation was heating up and became clear robert mueller was investigating not just potential campaign collusion but obstruction of justice. mueller will look thats as fitting into a pattern of conduct that looked to some legal observers like a conspiracy by the president to obstruct justice. and it starts when he allegedly asked james comey to drop the investigation into national security adviser mike flynn. when he fired james comey, then he tells the russians in the oval office that that firing relieved great pressure.
he also -- we have reported and others have reported, asked his intelligence chiefs to say publicly that there was no collusion. there have been reports he put pressure on jeff sessions. urged him not to recuse himself from the investigation. also urged him to fire the deputy fbi director. so this firing would fit into that pattern but mueller would have to show that it was not for the stated reasons of mueller having a conflict of interest but it was to make the russia investigation go away. and to do that, he'll have to interview people who may have knowledge of trump's intentions and state of mind. >> until this moment, the president and the white house have repeatedly said this story is fake news. let me just remind people of the drum beat of that. >> the president is not discussing firing bob mueller. >> mr. president, you thought about or considered leading to the dismissal of the special counsel. anything bob mueller could do that would send you in that direction? >> i haven't given it any thought. >> are you considering firing robert mueller? >> no, not at all. >> is he setting the stage for
firing bob mueller? >> no, there's no conversation -- >> there's no way he's going to fire him? >> there's no conversation about that whatsoever in the white house. >> are you considering firing robert mueller? >> no, i'm not. no. what else? what, are you surprised? >> the 1,000th time, we have no intentions of firing bob mueller. >> yet, about that same time, ken, weren't there people close to this administration who were also going on tv and sort of making the case for why maybe he should fire robert mueller? >> yeah, pointedly, christopher ruddy, the ceo of newsmax was a friend of trump which spoke to trump around that time and came out and gave an interview to pbs where he said the firing of mueller is actively under consideration and he urged the president not to do it. he said it would be a disaster and could lead to impeachment. a lot of people are looking at that clip today. the white house subsequently denied that was true but now tarks peeit appears it was. >> around the time president trump wanted to fire robert
mueller, some of his closest confidantes were saying, yes, he has the power to do it. even suggested he was ready to pull the trigger. listen to that. >> if there was a basis upon which, there was a question that raised the issues that are serious, as in the situation with james comey. the president has authority to take action. whether he would do it is ultimately a decision the president makes. >> he's considering perhaps terminating the special counsel. i think he's weighing that option. i think it's pretty clear by what one of his lawyers said on television recently. >> ari melber is my colleague. robin goodman is a professor at nyu low and noah. good to see all of you. let's step back for a moment if we can, ari, and talk about the implications and the legality of a president of the united states if he would decide to fire robert mueller. >> well, he doesn't have the power legally to personally fire bob mueller.
he appears somewhat aware of that because "the new york times" report says he's number one talking to white house counsel about how to get the doj to do it and, number two, also exploring whether to remove the person who does have that power, the acting attorney general for the russia probe, rod rosenstein. now if you come up with a good enough reason, and i can read what the reasons are under the rules. misconduct, dereliction of duty, incapacity. so the person is just not able to do the job. a conflict of interest, which is a legally defined term or other good cause, then the acting attorney general and only that person may do so. so what we're really talking about is kind of a bank shot where the president is trying to get someone at the doj to do this for him. and the big question is, if you did try to do it, and he still could, according to these reports that's on his mind, ultimately, bob mueller is prepared for this. he's known about this for months when the public did not and they can go to a judge and make the argument that it's an unlawful firing and demand to be
reinstated. >> but why now, noah? this hand seven, eight months ago. so it does make you wonder. suddenly all these leaks are coming out. "the new york times" gets it and "washington post" and nbc. why? >> well, i mean, speculation is that a lot of this is coming out of mcgann's office personally. he feels in peril and we don't know any more details. i'm struck by the timeline. we know this hand in june but it was july when this all exploded. it was july when he sat down with the times and says i'm frustrated with jeff sessions. i wouldn't have hired him if he recused himself. if there's a red line, it's when they go after my personal finances. we know they're going after his finances. we know this has been stewing n he's been rheuminating on this for some time. republicans could make a good argument that going after donald trump's finances expands beyond the remit of this investigation. and they should act on it. unfortunately, republicans have been swinging at just about every pitch saying that donald trump is being persecuted by the fbi and every other element of
this justice department. if they make that argument now, it would be muddled. >> one of the arguments they're making today, ryan, is, but he didn't do it. so why does it matter? is there such a thing as a pattern of behavior? how does this all fit together? or is this nothing more than something he thought he might do and then got talked out of it and it doesn't mean anything? >> it's very serious that he didn't just think about doing it but he actually issued the order. to the white house counsel. and then the white house counsel said if you want me to follow through with this, i will resign. then he stepped back from the brink. but he doesn't just think about it. he took the action. that's significant. and then it adds to this pattern of behavior and his thinking and other reports in july and out of the times that he's really trying to shut down the investigation. comey is engaging in bad conduct with the clinton e-mails or something like that and then tries to shut down mueller as well. that's what also the pattern starts adding together. it's about the final case for
obstruction of justice. it's not that this individual case would amount to it on its own terms. >> i want to go back to just before he left to go to davos and had that impromptu gaggle. wife says this is the find of thing that absolutely drives -- it has to drive his legal team crazy when he just decides, oh, i think i'll wander into that little briefing and have a few words with members of the press there. here's what he basically said that i tong a lot of people sounds like a potential defense against obstruction of justice. take a listen. >> here's what we'll say. and everybody says. no collusion. there's no collusion. now they're saying, oh, well, did he fight back? did he fight back? you fight back. you fight back. oh, it's obstruction. >> he says the only thing he did was fight back. >> it's a fascinating window into his mind-set. and to be fair to him, the more genuinely ignorant hie seems of these rules, the better it is for his legal defense?
>> really, i thought ignorance of the law was no defense. >> that is true, but when you have a case that hinges so much on intent with a person who, unlike me or you, has so much power. if you or i go in and try to get a prosecutor fired or talk to a witness, well, i mean, that's easily obstruction because there's no possible way we have any legitimate business there. the difference here, and the muddle that dershowitz and others have tried to turn into a fog is, well, wait a minute. he does have an authority over the fbi director and the doj to some degree, although not every officer in there. so if he's ignorant and just making a lot of noise and then people stop him from doing the worst things, there's an argument there. the problem is that the pattern that seems to be emerging from these reports is of a person who is very canny, very secretive, who doesn't just call rod rosenstein and toward but tries to get other people to do it who ask people to leave the room when he wants to talk about russia. there is an argument, i will
say, to be fair. an argument that there is a pattern of secrecy and two trumps emerging. and that is bad. >> and understanding when other people shouldn't be watching what he's doing. let me read something from "the new york times" story. mr. mcgahn disagreed with the president's case and says firing mr. mueller would have a catastrophic effect on mr. trump's president. mr. mcgahn also told white house officials that mr. trump would not follow through on the dismissal on his own. the president then backed off. you wonder if maybe devin nunes, let's say, trey gowdy, should pay attention here. does it seem that for trump to do this he needs an accomplice to push him in that direction? that's sort of the message that we're getting from this. >> yeah, i would imagine. and what would the republican reaction to this be on the hill? i'm not sure today. again, in july, we had a cascade of quotes on the record and off the record saying this would be a very bad move, put us in a very bad position. >> and supporting robert
mueller. this is a guy who had impeccable credentials at the beginning of this. now suddenly, he's not such a great guy. >> as i recall, lindsey graham w flirting with a legislative remedy saying donald trump cannot act on this without certain parameters. would he say that today? i don't think so. quite a bit of the republican base has come to the conclusion that there is something inappropriate happening here. and to rally around the president and if and when he moves -- >> inappropriate by the people accusing because i'll tell you, i've been out and doing these panels with trump supporters, and noah, i tell you, they think that this is all drummed up. they think that this is fake news. they think people are out to get donald trump. and they think even if what is alleged happened, it's not that big a deal. is that what you hear? >> so i think that they might be in that kind of cocoon of thinking about that. but i think when -- if and when bob mueller comes forward with an indictment or a report that
establishes the facts and many more facts than he knows, than any of us know, then that changes the picture. especially for people that aren't following this very closely, that can drop out of the thin, blue skies. some of the other indictments when manafort was indicted, gates was indicted and flynn was indicted, those aren't things you can say are fake news. the fbi is behind it, mueller is behind it and a court adjudicates whether there's sufficient evidence for it. that would be the game changer. >> noah rothman, ari melber, thank you. watch ari and kara swisher's special "revolution, google and youtube changing the world." they sit down with the ceos of those companies to discuss technology's rapid pace of change in a special town hall event sunday night at 9:00 eastern on msnbc. public distance between the president and his chief of staff. while ivanka trump tries to
quash the rumors. is john kelly possibly the next to leave the white house? plus, growing calls for accountability after more than 150 women accuse larry nassar of sexual assault. a new resignation at the university where he worked and the big changes demanded of usa gymnastics. hey, dustin. grab a seat. woman: okay. moderator: nice to meet you. have you ever had car trouble in a place like this? (roaring of truck) yes and it was like the worst experience of my life. seven lanes of traffic and i was in the second lane. when i get into my car, i want to know that it's going to get me from point a to point b. well, then i have some good news. chevy is the only brand to receive j.d. power dependability awards for cars, trucks and suvs two years in a row. woman: wait! (laughing) i definitely feel like i'm in a dependable vehicle right now. woman 2: i want a chevy now. woman 3: i know!
woman 2: i want a chevy now. alright, i brought in high protein to help get us moving. ...and help you feel more strength and energy in just two weeks! i'll take that. -yeeeeeah! ensure high protein. with 16 grams of protein and 4 grams of sugar. ensure. always be you. [ click, keyboard clacking ] [ keyboard clacking ]
office on wednesday was a deliberate dig at kelly. one senior white house official reportedly calling it a shot at mr. kelly. so is john kelly about to join the long list of white house officials who have departed? joining me is ashley parker, washington post white house reporter. we hear the president was furious when kelly made these comments about immigration last week. >> i told him there's been an evolutionary process this president has gone through as a campaign and pointed out to all of the members in the room that they all say things during the course of campaigns that may or may not be fully informed. >> may not be fully informed. you contributed to a story in today's "washington post" about the president and kelly's complicated relationship. what's going on there? >> so it is complicated. we heard the same thing as well. this is a relationship like all relationships with this president that sort of ebbs and
flows and we found out that they say these men can swear at each other and get mad and then make up. and that does seem to be the case. but this first major rift that we're all now talking about did happen in those comments where kelly said the president was uninformed and then kelly was going to brief reporters about the upcoming immigration legislation. and the president found out about that shortly before that briefing was supposed to happen. and he made the decision that he was going to stop by for an impromptu visit. a number of staff noted president trump has never once walked into general kelly's office or, frankly, the staff member of any -- the office of any staff member for that matter. and so this was unprecedented in a way that reflected the president's frustrations towards general kelly. >> there's also this notion that if a member of the staff actually wants to get the ear of the president, if they want to get through to him, they go on tv and say it. >> that's certainly true.
and that's certainly the case now with members of congress and sort of these outside friends and confidantes who under general keke kelly's watch are having trouble reaching the president. the first six months or so it was confusing but instead of wausking into the oval office, they'd walk outside, get in front of the tv camera and say something. under general kelly, within the west wing, that has stopped a little bit and now if you are a white house staffer, at least to get a message to the president is to go through general kelly. on the one stand, the president likes that discipline. he said it gives him time to think. on the other hand, this is a very undisciplined man at times and he chafes at that newfound structure that kelly has brought. >> john kelly was not with the president at davos, at the world economic forum. that spufueled a lot of this speculation.
is the fact that john kelly didn't know g exactly what the white house says? he stayed behind to work on legislative issues or is it another sign he could be on his way out? >> i think that's a fair and open question and you've had staffers say very plausibly that general kelly is the chief of staff, the state of the union is coming up. he's one of the people behind this immigration push and it made sense for him to stay home and all of that is potentially true. general kelly's detractors say that -- and they are correct in pointing out when the white house announced who was heading to davos with president trump on wednesday, his name was at the top of that list. the white house had to issue a clarification. and general kelly is not going. kind of captured the inherent tension which is the president is frustrated but, yes, general kelly has real work and by many accounts doing a good job.
and there's two explanations for why he could have stayed home. >> nbc political analyst ashley parker, good to see you. thanks. major new developments in the sex abuse scandal that sent the usa gymnastics doctor to prison. we'll speak to one of larry nassar's victims as the fallout grows. and the candidate for the u.s. senate who called feminists she devils and career-obsessed banshis. and we're finding the message trump tells global leaders america first is not necessarily mean leading everyone else behind. it takes a lot of work but i really love it. i'm on the move all day long... and sometimes, i don't eat the way i should. so, i drink boost to get the nutrition i'm missing. boost high protein nutritional drink has 15 grams of protein to help maintain muscle and 26 essential vitamins and minerals, including calcium and vitamin d. all with a great taste.
boost gives me everything i need... to be up for doing what i love. boost high protein be up for it for 100 years, heritage and innovation have made gillette the #1 shave in america. now get gillette quality at lower prices -- every day. brought to you by 1200 workers in boston -- we're proud of giving you our best. gillette. the best a man can get. for her compassion and care. he spent decades fighting to give families a second chance. but to help others, they first had to protect themselves. i have afib. even for a nurse, it's complicated... and it puts me at higher risk of stroke. that would be devastating. i had to learn all i could to help protect myself. once i got the facts, my doctor and i chose xarelto®. xarelto®... to help keep me protected.
once-daily xarelto®, a latest-generation blood thinner... ...significantly lowers the risk of stroke in people with afib not caused by a heart valve problem. it has similar effectiveness to warfarin. xarelto® works differently. warfarin interferes with at least 6 blood-clotting factors. xarelto® is selective, targeting just one critical factor interacting with less of your body's natural blood-clotting function. for afib patients well-managed on warfarin, there is limited information on how xarelto® compares in reducing the risk of stroke. don't stop taking xarelto® without talking to your doctor, as this may increase risk of stroke. while taking, you may bruise more easily, or take longer for bleeding to stop. it may increase your risk of bleeding if you take certain medicines. xarelto® can cause serious, and in rare cases, fatal bleeding. get help right away for unexpected bleeding, unusual bruising, or tingling. if you've had spinal anesthesia, watch for back pain or any nerve or muscle-related signs or symptoms. do not take xarelto® if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. tell your doctor before all planned medical or dental procedures... ...and before starting xarelto®-about any conditions, such as kidney, liver, or bleeding problems.
there is new fallout in the american gymnastics sex abuse scandal. the u.s. olympic committee has issued an ultimatum demanding all members of usa gymnastics board of directors resign within the next six days. in washington, lawmakers are scrambling to respond to all this. the house expected to vote on a bill to protect young women who are victims of sexual abuse. there is also a bipartisan call from michigan lawmakers for an investigation into larry nassar. and michigan senator gary peters is calling on michigan state university to commission an
independent outside investigation. the university's board of directors expected to meet this afternoon. joining me to talk more about this, anne thompson, larisa boyce, a former gymnast who was a victim of larry nassar and katie phang. thank you all for being with us. ann, bring us up to date. it seems like this is changing at sort of head-turning speed. this is going deeper and broader than we would have even thought. >> and, obviously, after listening to those 150 women testify at larry nassar's sentencing, there needs to be a lot of change. the international olympic committee wants it to start with usa gymnastics. it has made that ultimatum for the board of directors to resign by next wednesday. if they don't all step down it will decertify usa gymnastics as the governing board of gymnastics in the united states. but a lot of people, of course, say that's not enough. that it needs to go even
further. where was the u.s. olympic committee doing all this. and, in fact, as aly raisman said in her impact statement. if just one adult had listened to one child, none of them would be standing here. and that's clearly one of the big issues that not only independent investigations and the ncaa will want to find out y was larry nassar continuing to treat athletes at michigan state but also the members of congress want to find out exactly what went on. >> larisa, first of all, i just want to say how incredibly brave you and all of your fellow athletes are. i'm coming out and speaking the way that you have done is going to save people. there is absolutely no doubt about the impact that you're going to have. but i wonder as you're watching all of this develop, you see usa gymnastics board of directors being told, get out of here. what do you need to see? you intimately knew the impact
this was having. how do we stop this from happening again? >> i think people need to start asking the tough questions and find out why this was able to go on for so long. you know, what is -- what has happened behind the scenes to cover this up? why, you know, and now michigan state university, mark hollis has resigned. he hasn't even really been in the forefront of this story, so what is -- why are they having him resign? what's behind all of that? and why did it take 150-some girls to get up there to make their statements for the world to start paying attention? i think that's a big question that i have. >> yeah, i think aly raisman raising the point that if just one adult had listened to one of you and had taken action, so much could have been avoided.
what was the reaction? were you afraid? help people to understand how difficult it was, and we already know from listening to the stories how many young girls were not believed or even if they were believed, nothing was done. how? >> i was a child. i was 16, and i told a trusted adult that i was -- that i had concerns. and she just couldn't believe it. i think because he was the nice guy. he was her friend. and so she was defending him over me. and she, you know, she humiliated me that night. i was embarrassed. i was silenced. i was, you know, my teammates were paraded in in front of me. it was all of that. it just kind of kept beating down on me and defeating me because it's hard enough to say something in the first place.
and instead of telling my parents or the right authorities, or even filing anything, she called and told larry nassar. and then sent me back to him. just the betrayal of that and when he came in the room and sat down at my next appointment, he said, so i talked to kathy, and so i apologized to him. i said i was so sorry. it was a big misunderstanding. so i think the mentality that people need to understand is if you don't believe a child when they bring this to you, it is defeating. and i didn't speak of it after that. i had to convince myself that i was wrong and i was conditioned to believe that i was wrong. i was brainwashed. >> have you had a chance, and i was moved by what i saw in that courtroom of many of you -- many of the people who have known
each other and who all testified finally having a chance to talk to each other, to hug each other to be with someone who understands exactly what you went through. are you taking any comfort or solace in the fact that there are at least is a recognition that what happened to you and all those other young women cannot happen again and is despicable in a way that defies language? >> yeah, it was beautiful to be able to finally hug those girls and meet each other and support each other through this because it's still a really hard process for us. being able to support each other, it has been huge, huge because we can tell each other when we're having a bad day or we had a bad dream or, you know, it's been beautiful that side of
it. and i think going forward, learning from this, i'm glad that we have been able to make a difference and that people are finally, finally paying attention. and the world can change, hopefully because of the bravery of so many girls that got up and spoke. >> you're making a tremendous difference. i don't think there's any doubt about that. and we all owe you a debt of gratitude for what you've done. there's going to be a report on sunday, and they've already published it. espn has been doing an investigation, not just about gymnastics program but athletics in general. they report they've found a widespread pattern of widespread denial, inaction, information, suppression of such allegations. and, obviously, people are being made to step aside. people are resigning their posts. but what are the potential legal ramifications of this, as we dig deeper into -- and deeper into how this and other instances
could happen? >> so as we saw in the fallout from the penn state scandal, not only could it cost institutions like michigan state but places and entities like the united states gymnastics association. it could cost hundreds of millions of dollars. a key point from a legal perspective is you have to look to the past and see what mistakes were made. were there avenues provided to the victims to be able to report this abuse, credibly taken and again, the point is so well made. even though it's a child, these are children that are competing. competitively as athletes. so how do you not ignore them? you expect them to perform at a certainly level of excellence but then discredit them because they're just children. and to be forward looking. what type of future policies and procedures are in place so that there can be accountability from a legal perspective civilly and criminally for conduct such as larry nassar's. >> one lawyer says to me yfrk
yesterday, anne thompson, that the law has not kept up with where we are as a society, how fast this has moved. but there are people in congress, bipartisan support to do something. what's going on on the hill? >> there's a group of congresspeople who have called for a hearing. they want to talk about not only what's happened in usa gymnastics but sexual abuse in usa swimming and issues in tae kwon do. earlier today on msnbc, new york congressman carolyn maloney spoke about what exactly they want to look at. >> we ought to look at the olympic committee that was created by congress in 1978 and they complained to them. they complained to everyone. and michigan state university failed to protect their students. they received federal funds. we have a federal responsibility to listen to it. >> i think what's very clear, if anybody thought this was going to end with the sentencing of larry nassar, they're sadly
mistaken. today mark hollis, the a.d. at michigan state resign. the board of directors is meeting at this hour. they're talking about nationwide search for a new president. luann simon, the profit msu stepped down earlier this week. a lot is happening and a lot has to change because this is unconscionable. >> thank you, anne thompson. larisa boyce. thank you. i'm completely blown away by you and your fellow gymnasts and what you have done. thank you for coming on and helping us understand what happened here. katie, i want to ask you one more question because "the wall street journal" just reporting that dozens of employees at las vegas mogul steve wynn's rezortss are accusing him of sexualizing the workplace, pressuring workers to perform sex acts. after trump's election, wynn became the national republican committee finance chairman. he has denied these allegations
saying in part the idea that i ever insulted any woman is prepostero preposterous. we find ourselves in a world where people can make allegations, regardless of the truth, and a person is left with a choice of weathering insulting publicity or engaging in multi-year lawsuits. it is deplorable for anyone to find themselves in this situation. we have reached out to the rnc for comment and haven't heard back. i just want to ask you about sort of where this leaves us because you know that if you are a woman going up against a powerful man, somebody with money, with resources, the deck has been so stacked against you. in this case, this article, the lead sort of story, the woman who says she was raped, dates back to 2005, and then it goes on through the years. are we at a point of more equity where a person who feels they have no power, even knowing
there will be pushback, now has a chance. >> i think we do now and that's a courtesy of the me too movement and i think the empowerment that comes from legal action, because that's exactly what happened. she did settle that lawsuit or did settle that claim with steve wynn for $7.5 million. nondisclosures, confidentiality provisions can be eliminated from these types of sexual harassment lawsuits and legal proceedings to be able to emporother victims to come forward and they understand somebody like steve wynn can't use his power and money to muzzle or silence people that are workers in his own hotels. >> katie phang, thanks to you. meantime, in missouri, one of the republicans running against senator claire mccaskill is getting skewered, even by members of his own party for a facebook post where cortlan cortland sikes says he expects to come home to a home cooked dinner at six every night from his fiance. he also posted about the daughters he hopes to have.
i don't want them to grow up into career-obsessed banshees who forgo home life and children and happiness of family to become she devils. among those reporting, who called him an unutterable moron and someone who says i wish that would all fit on a t-shirt. we'll be right back. and seamless experience across web and tablet? do you want $4.95 commissions for stocks, $0.50 options contracts? $1.50 futures contracts? what about a dedicated service team of trading specialists? did you say yes? good, then it's time for power e*trade. the platform, price and service that gives you the edge you need. looks like we have a couple seconds left. let's do some card twirling twirling cards e*trade. the original place to invest online.
he gets the best deal on the perfect hotel by using. tripadvisor! that's because tripadvisor lets you start your trip on the right foot... by comparing prices from over 200 booking sites to find the right hotel for you at the lowest price. saving you up to 30%! you'll be bathing in savings! tripadvisor. check the latest reviews and lowest prices. not in this house. 'cause that's no average family. that's your family. which is why you didn't grab just any cheese. you picked up kraft mozzarella with a touch of philadelphia for lasanyeah! kraft. family greatly. essential for vinyl, but maybe not for people with rheumatoid arthritis. because there are options. like an "unjection™". xeljanz xr.
a once daily pill for adults with moderate to severe ra for whom methotrexate did not work well. xeljanz xr can reduce pain, swelling and further joint damage, even without methotrexate. xeljanz xr can lower your ability to fight infections, including tuberculosis. serious, sometimes fatal infections, lymphoma and other cancers have happened. don't start xeljanz xr if you have an infection. tears in the stomach or intestines, low blood cell counts and higher liver tests and cholesterol levels have happened. your doctor should perform blood tests before you start and while taking xeljanz xr, and monitor certain liver tests. tell your doctor if you were in a region where fungal infections are common and if you have had tb, hepatitis b or c, or are prone to infections. needles. a must for vinyl. but for you, one pill a day may provide symptom relief. ask your doctor about xeljanz xr. an "unjection™". big speech by president trump today at the world economic forum in davos.
it is the center piece of his visit. both a defense and explanation of his america first philosophy. >> america is open for business and we are competitive once again. america first does not mean america alone. when the united states grows, so does the world. >> let's bring in ben white correspondent for politico. that almost sounded like both global liist and populist. >> a synopsis of the two. this speech was written mainly by gary cohn who is trying to say year going to pursue some bilateral trade deals, we'll be tough on trade and border, but we want to do deals, we want you to invest in the united states. you shouldn't be afraid of us. we're not trying to sdloi the global economy in any way. so this was like the globalist part of the white house trying to interpret trumpism for the
droud. and crowd. and i think it went over fairly well for them. >> and i think the populist part of this which president trump ran so successfully on was struck with this. let's take a listen. >> we know the single best anti-poverty program is a very simple and very beautiful paycheck. to be successful, it is not enough to invest in our economy. we must invest in our people. >> so deconstruct that message for us. >> right. well, what he's trying to say is we passed this big tax cut plan in the united states, you've already seen a bunch of companies, at&t, apple, another one every day saying that they will pay bonuses, increase wages and investment in the united states. so they are a little worried about this being a tax cut for corporations and the rich so they are hammering on the message that it trickles down to the workers. so this is kind of drum on message discipline saying we did cut taxes for koorcorporations,
it will help everybody either as well. so this is good trump on message and then you have all over the stuff going on which he will come back to once he leaves davos. but i think they are pretty pleased with how it went. >> there is another interpretation of this, which is that he says america is open for business, and yet at home this immigration fight is going on. and we saw the president shifted again on immigration when he unvaulu unveiled the new proposal yesterday. there is a 10 to 12 year path to citizenship for nearly 2 million d.r.e.a.m.ers and other undocumented individuals. but then there is that $25 billion for a border call and increased funds for border enforcement, limited family linked immigration and elimination of lottery visas. how is this likely to sit with the economic crowd? >> not very well. you know, this is where you see the stephen miller white house at war with the gary cohn white house.
miller didn't pay much attention to the davos stuff because he is working on the state of the union. but the u.s. economy needs more workers, not fewer. we have an aging population. so even if you are making a deem on d.r.e.a.m.ers and allowing them a path to citizenship, ifs at white house wants to do you are decreasing the overall number of legal immigrants allowed to come in through the lottery or through family migration, that is generally speaking bad for the u.s. economy and the davos crowd certainly doesn't like it. i don't think corporate america really likes it either because you need a big vibrant workforce and some of that is legal immigration. cutting it is absolutely contrary to any solid economic view of what needs to happen in the united states. >> ben white, always good to talk to you. thanks. and we'll be right back. thank you clients? well jd power did just rank them highest in investor satisfaction with full service brokerage firms... again. and online equity trades are only $4.95... i mean you can't have low cost and be full service. it's impossible. it's like having your cake and eating it too.
ask your broker if they offer award-winning full service and low costs. how am i going to explain this? if you don't like their answer, ask again at schwab. schwab, a modern approach to wealth management. (vo)just one touch.ith with fancy feast creamy delights, she can have just the right touch of real milk. easily digestible, it makes her favorite entrées even more delightful. fancy feast creamy delights. love is in the details. when this guy got a flat tire in the middle of the night,
so he got home safe. yeah, my dad says our insurance doesn't have that. what?! you can leave worry behind when liberty stands with you™. liberty mutual insurance. i even accept i have a higher risk of stroke as far as i used to. due to afib, a type of irregular heartbeat not caused by a heart valve problem. but no matter where i ride, i go for my best. so if there's something better than warfarin, i'll go for that too. eliquis. eliquis reduced the risk of stroke better than warfarin, plus had less major bleeding than warfarin. eliquis had both. don't stop taking eliquis unless your doctor tells you to, as stopping increases your risk of having a stroke. eliquis can cause serious and in rare cases fatal bleeding. don't take eliquis if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding. while taking eliquis, you may bruise more easily... ...and it may take longer than usual for any bleeding to stop. seek immediate medical care for sudden signs of bleeding, like unusual bruising. eliquis may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines.
that wraps up this hour. katy tur joining me now. >> it is 11:00 out west and 2:00 p.m. in the east. at this hour, president trump is aboard air force one heading back to washington, d.c. and he will return to perhaps the biggest news yet to break in the russia investigation. nbc news has confirmed that back in june trump ordered the firing of special counsel robert mueller and he might have followed through had it not been for white house counsel don mcgahn who threatened to resign. >> this is something that is going to infuriate the president when he returns here to the white house. this escalating russia probe and these new revelations will be here to greet him.
>> president trump's outrage over rob bherts muert mueller's investigation reaching a boiling point back in june ordering don mcgahn to have the justice department fire the special counsel, but mcgahn refused. >>tounding that he thought getting rid of mueller was a good idea. >> the president has considered reported firing or in the case of james koedoem actually fired five top officials including the big daddy of them all, robert mueller. >> trump had three reasons. one, a past dispute with mueller over fees at a trump golf club in virginia, two, his former firm's representation of son-in-law jared kushner, and three, he had been interviewed by -- he had interviewed to be the fbi director in the wake of james comey's termination. but the revelation that trump ordered mueller's firing contradicts what white house facials have been saying for